Report this post

Indeed - the 'DAoC or bust' hypetrain is overloaded with this one-track-minded bull.

This thread originally began with "UO or bust", so, it's only fair.

Aren't we all getting all pretty tired of one-true-game idealists, in general?

ESO just made the mistake of pitting them against each other, within the same title.\

"I thought this would be just like Skyrim" "No, it's going to be just like DAoC" "Why can't it be more like SWG" "Death Penalty Rawr!!" "That's now how the only True sandbox (UO) did it" "WoW clone!" (everyone's got a horse in this race, somewhere)

Maybe it'd be best to stop trying to force it into some other game's mold, entirely. That require Zeni to just ignore the ebb and flow of rabble rabble, and make ESO. Then everyone can pick up their soapboxes, and head home.

It won't be forced anywhere of course - and I don't mind that it has any of the elements it has;

3 way mass PvP

Non-solo gameplay

Lore stretched out of shape but not broken, broken...

I only care about the faction lock and the clumsy ass restrictive way they have done it. If you are going to bang on about an IP, and about an MMO of an IP - probably best to try to preserve as many of the things that are universally acknowledged to make that IP great?

Surely that should have been in the manifesto day 1...

... that the focus came so hard onto making a recreation of DAoC PvP and in the process lost track of a central strength of the IP is just bad design.

It is the work of the truly bias to characterise my posts as 'anti-DAoC', 'anti-PvP' or to characterise me as a 'one-true-game-idealist'.

I was pleased to see the IP made into an MMO...

... until I realised that half the gameworld would not be available to me - and the cascade of issues this would cause.

Report this post

Indeed - the 'DAoC or bust' hypetrain is overloaded with this one-track-minded bull.

This thread originally began with "UO or bust", so, it's only fair.

Aren't we all getting all pretty tired of one-true-game idealists, in general?

ESO just made the mistake of pitting them against each other, within the same title.\

"I thought this would be just like Skyrim" "No, it's going to be just like DAoC" "Why can't it be more like SWG" "Death Penalty Rawr!!" "That's now how the only True sandbox (UO) did it" "WoW clone!" (everyone's got a horse in this race, somewhere)

Maybe it'd be best to stop trying to force it into some other game's mold, entirely. That require Zeni to just ignore the ebb and flow of rabble rabble, and make ESO. Then everyone can pick up their soapboxes, and head home.

I just messed-up the formatting when I did a quick copy and paste on my iPad.

For all I know, the RvR they're designing may play totally different than the way DAoC did it. It's the people who are whining about DAoC supposedly taking over and ruinning this IP that are forcing that connection. The TES fundamentalists.

TESO is going to be TESO and in many different ways it will probably remind you of 20 other MMOs. MMOs borrow heavily from things that came before. That's neither good nor bad although it can be done well or badly...we'll just have to see once there is something to play.

Report this post

... until I realised that halfte gameworld would not be available to me - and the cascade of issues this would cause.

My son just told me he bought into the beta (signed up for, I'm guessing). I suspect he's expecting Skyrim, given how many hours he spent on Skyrim.

I made no comment, except "it probably won't be much like you think"--because, it doesn't matter what he thinks. Odds are good that every audience sub-segment is going to be nothing but unhappy it's not just like pick-your-something they've already played.

Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.

Report this post

... until I realised that halfte gameworld would not be available to me - and the cascade of issues this would cause.

My son just told me he bought into the beta (signed up for, I'm guessing). I suspect he's expecting Skyrim, given how many hours he spent on Skyrim.

I made no comment, except "it probably won't be much like you think"--because, it doesn't matter what he thinks. Odds are good that every audience sub-segment is going to be nothing but unhappy it's not just like pick-your-something they've already played.

I myself wll be playing the beta if I get a spot - I don't criticise what I haven't enough information about...

... which is what I am regularly accused of even though my one gripe so far is lack of freedom to explore - which is definately confirmed as central to game-play by the devs themselves.

I often think people on here can't read, and if they can, they can't dissect and critique.

One despairs at the future of a world with such undisciplined and illogical people in it.

I also think you are right about the flip side - those wanting a particular 'template'. Personally I never believed THAT would happen, and I don't need it myself, but I get accused of that too.

Despite the fact I don't think the devs have taken due consideration of one of the IP's core attractions - the sense of freedom - I think there is still a good enough chance the game will be good in other respects, including the quality of the PvP. But the 'invisible walls', or whatever they are going to do to enforce their edict on non-movement will be a constant irritation.

Report this post

Indeed - the 'DAoC or bust' hypetrain is overloaded with this one-track-minded bull.

This thread originally began with "UO or bust", so, it's only fair.

Aren't we all getting all pretty tired of one-true-game idealists, in general?

ESO just made the mistake of pitting them against each other, within the same title.\

"I thought this would be just like Skyrim" "No, it's going to be just like DAoC" "Why can't it be more like SWG" "Death Penalty Rawr!!" "That's now how the only True sandbox (UO) did it" "WoW clone!" (everyone's got a horse in this race, somewhere)

Maybe it'd be best to stop trying to force it into some other game's mold, entirely. That require Zeni to just ignore the ebb and flow of rabble rabble, and make ESO. Then everyone can pick up their soapboxes, and head home.

I just messed-up the formatting when I did a quick copy and paste on my iPad.

For all I know, the RvR they're designing may play totally different than the way DAoC did it. It's the people who are whining about DAoC supposedly taking over and ruinning this IP that are forcing that connection. The TES fundamentalists.

TESO is going to be TESO and in many different ways it will probably remind you of 20 other MMOs. MMOs borrow heavily from things that came before. That's neither good nor bad although it can be done well or badly...we'll just have to see once there is something to play.

... and for some inexplicable reason, across various threads often regard the TES fans complaints about lack of freedom to explore (NOT the PvP model in any other respect) as a threat to 'their' MMO because it is 'already in the game and isn't going to change', coupled with the assumption that the only way it can be fixed is to 'ruin' what a significant number of them firmly see as the DAoC-style PvP.

Try to put the cart before the horse all you like, you are still complaining about a reaction to established facts and opinions, not an instigation - which invalidates nearly everything you have said to the contrary.

Would it be unfair of me to predict there will be no admission as to the fundamental error made in you this respect?

I'll try to keep an open mind.

I didn't characterise the PvP model as DAoC style - others did.

I didn't say that model would be bad - quite the contrary.

I did say these elements should be integrated in a way which doesn't take something that's good about the IP away.

I would like the game to have freedom and factional PvP - so everyone has a dose of what they want.

You don't?

In all this complaining about my opinions - I am yet to see what yours truly are.

Would you like to share? This will certainly be the last time I try to bring the discussion back to the issues rather than as you have so far elected to do - concentrate on the perceived flaws of the people discussing them with the kind of casually insulting language you wouldn't use face to face, so please do take the opportunity presented.

... and for some inexplicable reason, across various threads often regard the TES fans complaints about lack of freedom to explore (NOT the PvP model in any other respect) as a threat to 'their' MMO because it is 'already in the game and isn't going to change', coupled with the assumption that the only way it can be fixed is to 'ruin' what a significant number of them firmly see as the DAoC-style PvP.

Try to put the cart beofre the horse all you like, you are still complaining about a reaction to established facts and opinions, not an instigation - which invalidates nearly everything you have said to the contrary.

Would it be unfair of me to predict there will be no admission as to the fundamental error made in you this respect?

I'll try to keep an open mind.

I didn't characterise the PvP model as DAoC style - others did.

I didn't say that model would be bad - quite the contrary.

I did say these elements should be integrated in a way which doesn't take something that's good about the IP away.

I would like the game to have freedom and factional PvP - so everyone has a dose of what they want.

You don't?

In all this complaining about my opinions - I am yet to see what yours truly is.

Would you like to share?

No it isn't, it's you who are trying to drive a wedge between what you consider to be two camps: DAoC vs. TES in everything you post...over, and over... In case you haven't figured it out by now, most of us in this forum are fans of both TES and DAoC. Not opposing factions as you would like to characterize it.

Your exact quote in that thread was:

"The obvious implication of this thread's title is of course this: DAoC Veterans Welcome - Elder Scrolls Veterans irrelevant.."

Want more? Here's what you said in another post:

"I take it to be self-evident (as do a great many other people - on both sides of the argument) that DAoC design choices have been forced into the mix and important TES elements have been erased from the game due to the way they have intergrated it. It is as clear as the nose on my face."

Your premise is obvious: DAoC elements are making TESO worse. Nothing wrong with having that opinion although, there comes a point when you need to stop flogging and burry the damn horse.

The problem is that you're pointing fingers at anyone who has the nerve to say positive things about DAoC RvR here, wants to have a discussion about that or, heavens forbid, thinks that the RvR addition is a damn good thing.

Report this post

Explain why you are reporting this post:(750 characters max.)

i think there is only 3 ways future mmo's can be successful - either by being rather a multiplayer/online game in the sense of a pvp heavy game (or cooparative) where the focus is rather on "matches", by being a very "segregated" themepark mmo which is heavily instanced but where players have the tool to make new content themselves or as a ture sandbox game...for that reason i would bet money on teso to fail...

Report this post

Explain why you are reporting this post:(750 characters max.)

Originally posted by Nemesis7884i think there is only 3 ways future mmo's can be successful - either by being rather a multiplayer/online game in the sense of a pvp heavy game (or cooparative) where the focus is rather on "matches", by being a very "segregated" themepark mmo which is heavily instanced but where players have the tool to make new content themselves or as a ture sandbox game...for that reason i would bet money on teso to fail...

You can keep your money as long as it is unclear how to determine a failure.

Report this post

Originally posted by asmkm22As much as I want to rally around your flag or whatever, I'm pretty sure they just said something like "we just wanted to create WoW with Elder Scrolls lore."

This.

Games like Eve and UO have more subs than most so called "sure shot success" themepark games.

But sandboxes don't work! Neither do WOW clones, as seen by the complete failure of all the WoW clones of the last 8 years.

WoW clones don't work not because of the so called "themepark" model but because those games suck. WoW does pretty much everything better than those "clones". But more importantly most people are not willing to pay sub fees anymore so at the moment there are extremely few games which are still P2P. The P2P model doesn't work anymore. It only seems to work for EVE and WoW. But saying that games which are themeparks cannot succeed is just wrong. I mean the most popular MMO of all time is a themepark.

Report this post

Explain why you are reporting this post:(750 characters max.)

To the OP:

I would actually say the opposite. When's the last time a AAA sandbox MMO was actually developed? It's been years if not a decade almost. Look at all the non Sandbox MMOs and look which ones make it....maybe 2 or 3? Every other one seems to disintigrate.

I would say the market is ready for a AAA Sandbox. There are plenty of us Pre Tram. MMO players who would leave the garbage that is out there now to play a quality game with Freedom, options and doesn't hold your hand the whole time.

Report this post

Explain why you are reporting this post:(750 characters max.)

I hope that no real developer reads this crap we post here and uses it to try and create a game. I don't want a game that was made with "sandbox" in mind. I want a game designed with fun elements, solid combat, decent story, and...most importantly...player generated content tools. I would easily play "themeparks" if they would focus on more player generated content tools. But no one is really asking themselves, "How can we enable players to create content for us?". The wall themeparks deal with is that content cannot be created faster than it is consumed without gating said content. Gating is a bad mechanic, it provides nothing positive to the experience. Instead of gating, more attention needs to go into creating systems that allow players themselves to bridge the content gap, and in more ways than just "peeveepee".

Report this post

Explain why you are reporting this post:(750 characters max.)

When I say Sandbox, I really mean EQ type world where if you want to get from A-B on a map...it may take you a while and a couple of deaths if you dont know what you're doing...a world that makes you sweat with fear IRL because there isn't a virtual nanny behind you whiping ur arse for you.

Report this post

... that the focus came so hard onto making a recreation of DAoC PvP and in the process lost track of a central strength of the IP is just bad design.

Bad design, or not your ideal design? Bad design would implicate that the design goes against the game-play that they are trying to create.

We all know there are three home realms, we all know they are divided by allegiance. Those realms play as home turf to each respective side, they will be off limits to everyone else. Many people who begrudge this design have it in their head that means exploration is lost. Fair enough, it's a fair gripe, but not exactly the truth of the matter, as to say there is no possibility for exploration within the game.

Quite to the contrary at least regarding official game marketing. They call their quest system exploration based, you have to explore to find these quests, well supposedly. What does that say exactly..Or. at least hint at? To me it would require expansive world design. How else would you fit a significant amount of "exploration" quests into an area?

I don't think it's a secret that a major facet of this design is to solidify a peaceful PVE leveling area. Many will begrudge this idea as well, and that's their choice to make if they prefer FFA PVP, or having all areas open. That does not mean that this gives them governance over what is bad or good game design. Simply put it's this type of attitude that creates many of these divides we see around here.

If the goal is to create safe, carefree adventuring to no peril but the Ai's, this is an ideal design to offer that type of experience.

You could argue that their design favors one franchise over another, yet, I really do not feel that's a fair assesment based on all info out there.

It's the meat of the experience that is most important to this logic. Will a majority play as they do a typical PVE experience or will they find themselves in PVP for most of their time? We do not really know this at present. What will the overall game-play experience feel like? ANother thing we do not know.

Based on marketing we know they will have closer combat to TES than DAOC, we know the lore will be based around TES, we know they want to capture a TES feel to the environments allocated. We do not know the size or design of these individual lands.. We do not know how they will incorporate TES lore into the experience, Books? WHat about dungeon design? Closer to TES or DAOC?

There's a lot to consider on the subject of capturing a TES feel.

For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson

It is a sign of a defeated man, to attack at ones character in the face of logic and reason- Me

Report this post

That title will never work. A TRUE SANDBOX mmo everything is created by the players. They run the market they gather the supplies there are no Npc's the players have to get everything. The reason this game could never exist is because all the players would be farmers and miners. Not to mention that It can't have a learning guide of any sort because that interferes with how the players learn and control the game.

Now personally as far as sandbox like mmorpgs that are being released Arche Age will probably be the most successful. Which is why I am waiting for it.

Report this post

because for the millionth time a shot caller who use to be at Mythic did what Mythic does best, rehash their old work.

^^^^^

THIS

As they say in the courtroom, Res Ipsa loquitur.

Everyone likes to act like their is some grand reason behind why the devs do what they do, the truth is fairly simple, sandbox isa risk, could fall flat on its face, something they have done before but deviates slightly from the beaten path is safe, and could make a quick cash grab in sales.

Quotations Those Who make peaceful resolutions impossible, make violent resolutions inevitable. John F. Kennedy

Life... is the shit that happens while you wait for moments that never come - Lester Freeman

Lie to no one. If there 's somebody close to you, you'll ruin it with a lie. If they're a stranger, who the fuck are they you gotta lie to them? - Willy Nelson

Report this post

because for the millionth time a shot caller who use to be at Mythic did what Mythic does best, rehash their old work.

...OR...

Sandbox games are actually really terrible for the vast majority of gamers who want something more fun, more filling, and more user-friendly. Its hella lot more fun to actually play a good game rather then get bogged down in hideous development principles that do nothing more other then to slow the game down keeping you playing.

Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!

Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!

Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!